IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Debunkers Respond To Dennis Cimino, A Few Comments Copy & Pasted

jfetzer
post Mar 21 2012, 01:00 PM
Post #81





Group: Troll
Posts: 129
Joined: 16-July 08
Member No.: 3,735



This is embarrassing, but illuminating. You have dismissed a theory (NPT) that you have not understood and cannot define.

You have made a point of not reading my articles, which you are nevertheless willing to dismiss with the back of your hand.

You offer an example that has no relevance and which, if it did, would support the use of video fakery without understand it.

And you talk about a can full of Coke when you know that an airplane is more comparable to an empty can. I am stunned!


QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 21 2012, 11:50 AM) *
Absolutely. Here's one of them.



This does not mean I think an F-14 hit the south tower, but that looks like a real plane to me. How about you Jim?





Jim, you're a scientist, right?. Do me a favor. Shoot a filled can of Coke at 590 mph at 1/4 inch steel, let me know what happens.

After you get done with that, increase the density of the aluminum surrounding the a filled coke can and try it again with thicker steel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 21 2012, 01:04 PM
Post #82



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (jfetzer @ Mar 21 2012, 01:00 PM) *
This is embarrassing, but illuminating. You have dismissed a theory (NPT) that you have not understood and cannot define.


And apparently you have not read the top of our home page.

QUOTE
You have made a point of not reading my articles, which you are nevertheless willing to dismiss with the back of your hand.


Because I have all the time in the world to research your work... rolleyes.gif

QUOTE
You offer an example that has no relevance and which, if it did, would support the use of video fakery without understand it.


Jim, no matter how hard you try, Pilots For 9/11 Truth will never endorse your theories, nor any other theory. Get used to it. I been explaining this to you for years. This does not mean I do not like you as a person... for what it's worth... smile.gif

QUOTE
And you talk about a can full of Coke when you know that an airplane is more comparable to an empty can. I am stunned!


Really? Aircraft don't hold liquid in their wings? And an empty Coke can has internal structural supports such as a main spar, bulkheads, and ribs??? Has seats, passengers (averaging 170-180 lbs of 70% liquid), a cockpit filled with heavy instruments, Flight Management computers, heavy ADC/IAC computers, DAU's, and luggage? I suppose an empty coke can also has 6000 lb engines hanging from it?

Ever held even a small Altimeter from a Cessna in your hands? It's heavier and more solid than a full can of Coke. Then go out an hold some of these in your hands....that's an avionics bay.. .just a quick search i did.

Jim, better yet, shoot an FMC computer into 1/4" steel at 590 mph, let me know how you make out. After you get done with that, try human dummies filled with liquid. Or perhaps even a thawed chicken.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jfetzer
post Mar 21 2012, 02:15 PM
Post #83





Group: Troll
Posts: 129
Joined: 16-July 08
Member No.: 3,735



Rob,

I am not going to try to persuade you of anything. But I would appreciate it if you were to visit "Inside Job: More Proof of 9/11 Duplicity" and offer your assessment of the images from the Naudet Brothers video. Does that look like a Boeing 767 to you?

Or go to "9/11: Planes/No Planes and 'Video Fakery'" and review the images of Flight 175 effortlessly entering the South Tower? I have no idea whether you have ever studied physics, but do you seriously believe what you are seeing is a real plane entry?

From your previous statements, you do not believe that a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksville and, from what else I read, you are clearly skeptical that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. So I think you are about half-way there. Give this just a little more thought.

I would observe, by the way, that the arguments I have given are scientific, because they involved reasoning based upon laws of nature, including laws of physics, engineering and aerodynamics. Faulty analogies with more differences than similarities don't cut it.

Thanks for putting up with me. I respect the right of everyone here to believe what they want to believe. Having taught logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years, however, I encourage everyone to take some time to study the relevant evidence.

Jim

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 21 2012, 12:04 PM) *
And apparently you have not read the top of our home page.

Because I have all the time in the world to research your work... rolleyes.gif

Jim, no matter how hard you try, Pilots For 9/11 Truth will never endorse your theories, nor any other theory. Get used to it. I been explaining this to you for years. This does not mean I do not like you as a person... for what it's worth... smile.gif

Really? Aircraft don't hold liquid in their wings? And an empty Coke can has internal structural supports such as a main spar, bulkheads, and ribs??? Has seats, passengers (averaging 170-180 lbs of 70% liquid), a cockpit filled with heavy instruments, Flight Management computers, heavy ADC/IAC computers, DAU's, and luggage? I suppose an empty coke can also has 6000 lb engines hanging from it?

Ever held even a small Altimeter from a Cessna in your hands? It's heavier and more solid than a full can of Coke. Then go out an hold some of these in your hands....that's an avionics bay.. .just a quick search i did.

Jim, better yet, shoot an FMC computer into 1/4" steel at 590 mph, let me know how you make out. After you get done with that, try human dummies filled with liquid. Or perhaps even a thawed chicken.


This post has been edited by jfetzer: Mar 21 2012, 02:19 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jfetzer
post Mar 21 2012, 02:27 PM
Post #84





Group: Troll
Posts: 129
Joined: 16-July 08
Member No.: 3,735



Here you confirm that you not only have not read my articles but you have no even read my posts on this forum! I've explained that the question is NOT the use of video fakery by faking videos but that the evidence supports the use of fake planes in both of the alleged crashed in New York: an arrangement of four UVAs in the case of the North Tower and of a sophisticate hologram in the case of the South.

I wish it were not so, but as I have also explained, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the case!" You may be an expert on planes as a pilot, but I am an expert on logic and reasoning, where your failure to even acknowledge your misunderstanding of my position, even after I have explained it repeatedly on this very forum, has to be deliberate and duplicitous.

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 21 2012, 11:57 AM) *
If i had FDR data from the WTC which shows too high to hit the WTC, I would have petitioned the NTSB as to why as well, as i did with the Pentagon.

The fact of the matter is Jim, that ample amount of evidence exists to determine actual aircraft hit the WTC, yet does not prove such aircraft were the ones reported, while there is hardly any evidence to support the govt story with respect to the Shanksville and Pentagon events. In fact, the data they have provided, including witness, conflicts with their story.

Jim, are you saying that the evidence gathered for the WTC events is similar and can be compared to the evidence gathered for the Shanksville and Pentagon events?

If so, great! Please provide as many videos of the Shanksville and Pentagon events for starters.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 21 2012, 02:29 PM
Post #85



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (jfetzer @ Mar 21 2012, 02:15 PM) *
you do not believe ...



My "beliefs" are irrelevant.

Over the years I have been told (as well as others being told) what I "believe" more times than care to remember. Especially from those who make excuse for the govt story. Most of it are strawmans.

The facts are the facts. We do not offer theory. Our Mission Statement on the top of our home page speaks for itself.

As I have stated in this thread... people are free to pursue any avenue they feel appropriate. We still do have some freedom left in this country. I will not knock anyone for pursuing what they feel is right for themselves. Try not to do that to me, or our organization in general, if we don't feel your work is a priority, or even worthy, of research, when our plate (my plate in particular) is already more than full.

Again, I would appreciate it if you would post a disclaimer to any of your future articles which analyze NPT, that P4T do not endorse NPT... if you use our work. If you are unable to do so, you do not have permission to use our work in any of your future articles. And again, I'm not trying to be hostile or condescending, I am trying to lessen the distractions I have, when I already have a full plate to work on other projects.

I have already put other work on the back burner to address this issue here. Now excuse me if I no longer pay as close attention to this thread.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 21 2012, 03:39 PM
Post #86





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (Dennis Cimino @ Mar 20 2012, 02:28 AM) *
I'm not a disinformation shill and I don't think Fetzer is either.

he's not a pilot. and in all honesty, non-aviation people really don't get it. aviation is a very very hard thing for most people to fully comprehend and fully
understand.

only a pilot with a lot of experience can fully grasp a lot of stuff we take for granted...and it's not too very often you'll find a layperson who
even remotely comes close to understanding either the FAR's or the reason why procedures are the way they are.

to some extent we're priveleged men, Rob. we have been there and done that which few could ever do.

when we have good eggs trying to get a clue we have to be more patient with them and not assume them all to be like the neocons who could care less about
aviation or what is going on with aerodynamics. they only understand death meting out and dealings.


Fetzer has accidentally shafted me strictly because I have given him license to do stuff I should have INSISTED THAT I DO, like vetting of every single picture that went into that article.

that I guess is my fault for not stipulating it. it took a long time for him to get Duff to accede to me publishing ANYTHING there at all.

in the comments, Duff goes way out on a line to defend that article. and I think that means a lot. VT could be a good foot in the door for some P4T stuff other than my work. In time, we should plug for international articles too, in high profile places where we had not gone before.


I'm going to bed but I hope that people realize that I am not the fucking enemy. nor is Fetzer. the affiliation is far from perfect but we are trying to get people globally to wake up. We are running out of time.


I absolutely agree!

The thing that is most distasteful about the whole cyberworld 911 Truth movement is that so many individuals a) insist upon attacking OTHER individuals with the same basic goal as themselves, or b) take themselves so damn seriously. Good grief, we're all human and positively WILL make mistakes.

That the picture of the supposed flight path at the Pentagon has been made into a mountain, and that now Rob & Jim are almost calling each other names is a comment on humankind more than anything.

We pilots must understand, and I think we all do, that NONpilots are not up on the lingo and cannot have a full appreciation of aerodynamics and such. We should keep that idea in the front of our communications with the public.

My opinion is that Dennis has hit a homerun with his article. That government apologists must pounce upon the relative inaccuracy of a frigging diagram that is fairly close shows how desperate they are and how weak their argument is.

We do not need to go down into the gutter with them. The OCT is a damn lie and even the apologists know that. Dennis' piece is simply more evidence of HOW AND WHY it is a lie.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 21 2012, 04:54 PM
Post #87



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



i had a bit of time to quickly scroll through the thread started by one of our stalkers....

I about fell off my chair laughing after reading this... so i thought i'd share...

"tsig" posts (in reference to the traffic viewing this thread here on P4T) -

Right now:

8 User(s) are reading this topic (6 Guests and 1 Anonymous Users)
1 Members: jfetzer


and I was one of the guests.


"Sword Of Truth" replies -

Is he [jfetzer] really a member here? [on JREF]

Do we have to stop making fun of him?



... and they wonder why they are referred to as 'duhbunkers'... laughing1.gif

Psst, SOT, your buddy was referring to the people viewing this thread, here on P4T. ......Dumbass.

And here are the current users viewing this thread...

18 User(s) are reading this topic (14 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
4 Members: rob balsamo, onesliceshort, will52, Rickysa
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 21 2012, 09:50 PM
Post #88



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Our stats graph over the past week.




Thank you Bill! Keep em coming!

laughing1.gif

(Keep in mind, the above are only Forum Stats. They do not include main site stats)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Mar 22 2012, 01:07 PM
Post #89


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (jfetzer @ Mar 21 2012, 03:13 PM) *
Another nice example of misunderstanding NPT. It has nothing to do with video fakery per se, which would be any use of videos to convey false or misleading impressions of the events of 9/11. It has to do with the plane. NPT holds that no Boeings crashed at any of the alleged sites--not in Shanksville, not at the Pentagon, not into the North Tower and, most surprisingly, not into the South Tower.


I remember the days when a certain Mr. Pickering tried to smear the CIT research with NPT by coining the term "no plane at the Pentagon", implying that CIT were working on the same poor intellectual level and propagating a similar nonsense like Gerard Homgren R.I.P., Morgan Reynolds, the webfairy etc. etc. This term was eagerly picked up by Mr. Hoffman, Mrs. Ashley and other people of the radical LIHOP clique.

Funnily, Mr. Fetzer, you're doing exactly the same, blurring the difference between painstaking research and unsubstantiated speculation. It nearly looks like you're a buddy of Mr.Pickering. You two are damaging the best evidence we have, only from different positions. It's kind of a good cop/bad cop game.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 23 2012, 02:39 AM
Post #90





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (woody @ Mar 20 2012, 04:07 PM) *
I remember the days when a certain Mr. Pickering tried to smear the CIT research with NPT by coining the term "no plane at the Pentagon", implying that CIT were working on the same poor intellectual level and propagating a similar nonsense like Gerard Homgren R.I.P., Morgan Reynolds, the webfairy etc. etc. This term was eagerly picked up by Mr. Hoffman, Mrs. Ashley and other people of the radical LIHOP clique.

Funnily, Mr. Fetzer, you're doing exactly the same, blurring the difference between painstaking research and unsubstantiated speculation. It nearly looks like you're a buddy of Mr.Pickering. You two are damaging the best evidence we have, only from different positions. It's kind of a good cop/bad cop game.



Com'on people be real now, please!

If NPT simply means that none of the 'official' planes crashed at either locations, then I'm certainly also a NPT adherent and supporter.

Please try to use your imagination to the fullest. Regarding second tower, we see on all videos a plane slicing into the building effortlessly.
No resistance by the steel columns nor the steel spandrel plates or the concrete floors behind the plates is offered to any of the weaker
parts of the airplane, such as the wingtips and the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. None whatsoever.

But if that's not enough, next we come to the truly bizarre and totally mad:
In the instant the plane has fully penetrated the facade it comes to an abrupt halt!!??

We know this, because the split second after the plane disappears into the building, a big fireball takes shape on the right side of the building
15 – 20 meters along from the impact facade. Not halfway, not way into the building, but within the first quarter, or third, of the way in!
A fireball also forms outside of the entry hole.

We also know (because of the impact hole and the alleged direction the plane flew), that apart from the port side wing, most of the plane
would have missed the center core of the building, and hence should have continued more or less partly intact (because of the floors only)
on its over 800 km/h speed through the open office spaces, impacting the side wall and the far end wall, a mere 64 meters away from the
entry opening – or ca. 26 meters away from the 'undamaged' nose of the plane!! But (ignoring everything about the so-called "nosecone")
none of this happened!
No further impact (now from the inside of the tower) was visible either from the right side wall or from the North end wall in any of the
videos or photos we have seen of the exterior of the building. No outward bulging whatsoever of the walls, is seen anywhere!


The plane apparently stopped, dead in its track, just inside the perimeter wall!


I truly hope that not one single member of PF9/11T will even dream of entertaining this idea that such insanity could have taken place
…….Please!!!!

Let us instead gladly give this preposterous lunacy to the 'loyalists', the shills, the 'paid agents' and their 'research assistants', together with
the rest of the truly ignorant and hopelessly immature twerps amongst them.

The planes seen and witnessed in the skies that day is a completely different story that deserves its own close scrutiny and investigation,
and which has already for a long period admirably been started by many good people.

NPT therefore - seen in the Right Light - is an absolute fact as far as I'm concerned, and should naturally be supported by all other just and
wise people! wink.gif

Cheers

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 23 2012, 03:12 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 23 2012, 04:41 AM
Post #91





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



Just came across Shoestrings article on Bloggers.

'Much food for Thought' i Thought:

'However, despite Cooper's statement that the hijacking was "not an exercise, not a test," NEADS personnel continued to question whether information they received about the attacks was real or just simulation. For example, at 9:03 a.m., NEADS received a phone call informing it that a second aircraft had been hijacked, and personnel also saw the live television coverage of the second plane, Flight 175, crashing into the World Trade Center. A minute or two later, recordings of the operations floor reveal, several members of staff discussed these developments among themselves. One of them asked, "Is this explosion part of that that we're looking at now on TV?" Someone replied: "Yes. And there's a possible second hijack also--a United Airlines." Another person then commented, "I think this is a damn input, to be honest." An "input" is a simulations input, as part of a training exercise. Someone else said, "Then this is a damned messed-up input." [8]'


"I've never seen so much real-world stuff happen during an exercise."
- Major James Fox, Northeast Air Defense Sector, September 11, 2001

http://www.911blogger.com/dailynews

Cheers




This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 23 2012, 04:52 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Mar 23 2012, 05:14 AM
Post #92





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (amazed! @ Mar 21 2012, 02:39 PM) *
We pilots must understand, and I think we all do, that NONpilots are not up on the lingo and cannot have a full appreciation of aerodynamics and such. We should keep that idea in the front of our communications with the public.


Not many would dispute the fact that qualified and experienced professional pilots, aircraft maintenance engineers, FDR experts etc are better equipped to appreciate the subtle nuances (as well as the basics, I suppose) of aviation. But let's not forget about the role of the Student Forum Pilot; especially those who are prepared to actively defend not only the research, but also the REPUTATIONS of those who are courageous enough to publically question the OCT of 9/11.

It's simply amazing how much toxic waste gets posted on the internet, and despite my lack of specialised knowledge in any particular field, I still feel it incumbent upon me to respond when I see high quality work being tarnished by fuckheads who lack the intelligence and moral integrity to seek out and propagate the truth.

I'm not fishing for worthy.gif or cheers.gif or thumbsup.gif or shake.gif, but the fact is that I spend a lot of my spare time smacking down shills and debunkers who have made it their mission in life to smear P4T and others with defamatory remarks and disinformation. I might not grasp many of the technical details, but I'm reasonably capable of expressing the small fraction that I DO understand. As far as I'm concerned, 9/11 Truth is primarily a PR exercise. Not many people are even aware of it, let alone convinced by it.

My apologies for drifting off-topic, but as a means of illustrating the above, I have some more examples of the types of "conversations" I've had this week with cretinous sub human filth who continue to rubbish Dennis Cimino...both in terms of the article as well as him personally. Incidentally, I won't have time this weekend to go into bat for Dennis. In other words, the italicised comments below will probably go unchallenged. Perhaps that doesn't worry anybody else, but it worries me.

(Again, these have been copy and pasted on rkowens4's YouTube channel. Comments appear in reverse order - ie, the most recent ones are at the top.)

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
RetarDennis makes the claim that the plane was too high to hit the penty. based on 29.92 being the calibration setting for the altimeters ("there was no 18k adjustment, at any time"). Then claims later the adjustments to the altimeters were made. RetarDennis claims the turn was "skillfull and precise." Anyone actually veiwing the FDR recreation would (if they hadnt know what they were watching) assume the pilot was drunk. Very sloppy, and imprecise. jerky, inconsistant roll inputs, porpoising atlitudes.

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
RetarDennis claims the flight 77 crew as killed in their seats. False. Phone calls from 77 confirm the crew was at the back of the plane with the rest of the pax. RetarDennis claims simply "touching the yoke or rudder pedals" would disengage the autopilot. Also False. As anyone even minimally familiar with aviation knows, Eastern 401 resulted in A/P systems being reworked so that it takes a great deal of force applied to the controls to disengage the A/P. To prevent an accidental "bump" on a control turning off the system.

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
MoronDennis claims the hijackers would have had to immediately know precisely where they were "and I do mean IMMEDIATELY" order to navigate back. This is false. You dont need to know exactly where you are "AND I DO MEAN IMMEDIATELY" to use the A/P to make a 180 deg turn back towards the way you came. RetarDennis also claims the initial turn back toward DC put it on the exact, precise path to the Penty. also false. FDR data shows course corrections over mid-West Virginia. And again about 10 mins from impact, before the hijackers turned off the A/P

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
It VIOLATES FARs for a civilian airliners to carry military IFF. Moron tells us the DC airspace is impenetrable (Frank Eugene Corder is unavailable for comment) and the penty (supposed) defense systems are impenetrable. Then claims they have had drills in the past where a plane was crashed intentionally into the Penty. Again, it cant be both. They would never run drills contemplated a plane crashing into the buliding if it was impossible for a plane to crash into the building.

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
MoronDennis states the turn was "standard rates" (which it was) then refers to it as a 6-g turn. It cant be both. A starard rate turn NEVER results in 6-g's. MoronDennis claims a high speed turn, well beyond Vmo. Yet the Data shows the speed was never higher than 300 kias (well below Vmo) and usually much lower, through the turn. MoronDennis marvles at how "precise and coordinated" the turn was. Then later admits they never used the rudders. It cant be both. They couldnt have been using the rudders with such "extreme precision" if they never touched the rudder. Also, anyone viewing the FDR simulation KNOWS the flights were nothing near coordinated turns.

EdgemanLL2 posted a comment
17 hours ago
Report Spam
Weirdo---youre correct. The "essay" is a literal treasure-trove of bullshit.A person could start with any paragrpagh amd reel off countless erroros. BTS is Bureau of Trans STATISTICS. Not the Bureau of Transportation Flight Schedules. BTS records statistics on ACUAL flights.Pick any date. On any date there are literally trillions of flights that DONT exist. Yet the BTS doesnt have any line-entries for flights not exist. Moron Dennis claims they must have used "EXTRORDINARY" body control to not touch the rudder pedals. Yet, its no more diffuclt to not put your feet on the rudder pedals than it is to (while driving down the highway on cruise control) to not touch the braks or throttle when your driving.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
20 hours ago
Report Spam
I can keep going.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
20 hours ago
Report Spam
The BTS does not record hijacked aircraft. And their statistics show Flight 11 from earlier weeks SO IT WAS a regular scheduled flight. The autopilot did the turn. It wasn't disengaged until later. It's easy to use the basic controls. They did bring their own GPS systems, but they had no need to even know their position. The crash in Colombia was in IFR conditions. The cockpit door wasn't recorded. It didn't show open at any point during the flight or on the ground.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
20 hours ago
Report Spam
Truly amazing, a Kook that hasn't heard of the fall of the Soviet Union. Any military threat would be detected hours before it would reach the US mainland. There's no need for air defense emplacements in Washington, because mobile systems can be placed in Washington before any conceivable threat would reach it. Not to mention that stationary emplacements would be tremendously easy to sabotage, unlike their mobile counterparts. Stinger type missiles don't even necessarily bring down an aircraft so why not fire one AND have high definition cameras pointed at the Pentagon's lawn.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
20 hours ago
Report Spam
Kevlar wouldn't help you for shit if you were being shot with 30mm or Hellfires(which can penetrate any known armor) or an aircraft for that matter. / Where's the source for this amazing information about the DC airspace doctrine, and why did they Avengers (Humvee mounted anti air system) to Washington D.C. after 9/11 and a year later. Before 9/11 there was only a restriction on flying over the White House, Congress and Mall area.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
21 hours ago
Report Spam
There is no evidence for a Point Defense System in Washington D.C. and no reason for there to be one. Aircraft had violated the DC airspace before and none were shot down, even when they wanted to shoot them and had time to do so. The fighter bases in the vicinity weren't part of the Aerospace Defense Command, they had no aircraft ready unlike the (COLD WAR REMNANTS) under NORAD command, whose doctrine was still governed by a Soviet invasion.. And a lot of good that Kevlar did although this is the first I've ever heard of it. Kevlar is only used in conjunction with ceramic armor to deflect low energy shrapnel and munitions.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
21 hours ago
Report Spam
Pentagon's MASCAL exercise was held primarily because: A) The Pentagon is located at the end of a runway. B) Just a few years ago an aircraft crashed in to the Potomac. C) The accident scenario would be less depressing than an attack scenario even though the exercise would refine skills for responding to both. / Here we are with all these morons pretending they know something yet they haven't a clue of the most basic aspects of the official account. I'll just ignore the fact that they smell like people who decided what happened before they reviewed any of the evidence. If you know why the hijackers attacked the US you know why they chose the targets they chose.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
21 hours ago
Report Spam
Researches who studied the aircraft impacts found that even putting the aircraft in a "sausage skin" for resulted in the same level of damage. That's because at those velocities it's no longer about the strength of the aircraft but the energy of the aircraft. You fucking morons pretend to be smart enough to figure out the inside job, but can't figure out A FUCKING FISH-EYE LENS. Did Silverstein give orders to the Fire Department or a demolition company? They had firemen in the building when he made the decision to pull them out. Even Alex Jones got this right - for five minutes. Fuck you.

Weirdo10o4 posted a comment
21 hours ago
Report Spam
The only flaw? It's got so many flaws in it that that whole article is a flaw. First paragraph it is: at comparable or higher speed a 757 is expected to behave exactly like the F-4 in the Sandia test, because it's built the same if not weaker than the F-4. It's not just 12 inches of concrete, it's 12 inches of REINFORCED CONCRETE meant to take the abuse of truck bombs. There is a clear mark left by the aircraft. I can source my claims, the article has no sources.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Mar 23 2012, 08:13 AM
Post #93


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Mar 23 2012, 06:39 AM) *
Com'on people be real now, please!

If NPT simply means that none of the 'official' planes crashed at either locations, then I'm certainly also a NPT adherent and supporter.

...

NPT therefore - seen in the Right Light - is an absolute fact as far as I'm concerned, and should naturally be supported by all other just and
wise people! wink.gif

Cheers


Certainly the term "No plane theory" can theoretidally be interpreted in a way which is compatible with natural laws and dozens of eyewitnesses. But that's not the point. For years now, the term NPT has the negative connotation of faked WTC impacts and is linked with Gerard Holmgren R.I.P, Nico Haupt, Rosalee Grable, Killtown, Morgan Reynolds, and some other names whose reputation is not the best, to say the least. It is therefore way too late to discuss the semantics of NPT. Any attempt to establish the term NPT as designation for a serious branch of research bears the big danger of mixing truth with half-truth and outright nuts.

Mr. Fetzer should know this, and I'm afraid he knows it.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 23 2012, 10:48 AM
Post #94





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Good post Mitosis.

It seems obvious to me that the numerous attacks against Dennis clearly show that government apologists are scared silly about the substance of his article. The ad hominem attack is as old as the hills, and indicates that those doing it do not have a leg to stand on in a fair and honest discussion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 23 2012, 11:17 AM
Post #95





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (woody @ Mar 21 2012, 11:13 AM) *
Certainly the term "No plane theory" can theoretidally be interpreted in a way which is compatible with natural laws and dozens of eyewitnesses. But that's not the point. For years now, the term NPT has the negative connotation of faked WTC impacts and is linked with Gerard Holmgren R.I.P, Nico Haupt, Rosalee Grable, Killtown, Morgan Reynolds, and some other names whose reputation is not the best, to say the least. It is therefore way too late to discuss the semantics of NPT. Any attempt to establish the term NPT as designation for a serious branch of research bears the big danger of mixing truth with half-truth and outright nuts.

Mr. Fetzer should know this, and I'm afraid he knows it.


Sorry, but i'm not sure i understand a word of what you're talking about here!

If you believe that no planes of any kind crashed at any of the 4 locations, that
would surely indicate the fact that 'fakery' in one form or another had taken place, yes?

If you believe that planes of any kind crashed at the 4 locations, then i can understand
why you don't appreciate the term NPT, but judging from your comment above, that
doesn't seem to be the case, correct?

If the term NPT appears to be such a problem, perhaps all that is needed is to find
another term that also would describe this same situation, but one we all could live with.
That would solve this problem rather quickly, so perhaps somebody could come up with
some suggestions we could all then vote upon?

I don't know much about Haupt, Grable and Reynolds, but thought that Killtown was
supposed to be one of the 'good' guys. Never heard him say anything i would disagree
with!

Concerning Holmgren, here's a link to an interview with him back in 2005 that i can't
find anything wrong with either.


http://www.septemberclues.info/AnInterviewGerardHolmgren.htm

Cheers

This post has been edited by Tamborine man: Mar 23 2012, 11:21 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aldo Marquis CIT
post Mar 23 2012, 12:04 PM
Post #96


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



Tambourine man,

NPT=no planes theory. Not non-impact theory. No planes theory originally and ONLY applied to the asinine disinformation /theories that no planes hit the towers. Disinformation operatives like fetzer and the anonymous Killtown desperately try to link the term to the genuine investigations done by PFT, CIT, and Dom DiMaggio proving there were planes and they didn't hit the target.

There were planes used on 9/11 at all events.

This Disinformation using the term "no planes" is designed to and HAS hurt the truth movement. It has divided it and allowed us to look inept and kooky.

Do you understand? Just because you redefine the term to mean something else in an attempt to play some type of kumbaya peacemaker doesn't mean the rest of the world defines the term the same way.

Planes hit the towers, videos were not faked.

Food for thought:

I've mentioned this story before. I met fetzer at the LA conference where Charlie Sheen spoke. After fetzer's little disinfo presentation he was swarmed by an older crowd of groupies. He had been promoting the "blue tarp box carrying something secret out of the pentagon" and I wanted to inform that it was one of the things he had been incorrect about and that it was just a blue tent rescuers were bringing onto the lawn. Well as I go up to him and tell him this and correct him, inadvertently in front of his adoring followers, he flips out and very forcefully and very aggressively insists I'm wrong. He literally, and angrily, gets in my face to talk me down, in an almost accusatory fashion. I found it too bizarre to be the behavior of a "scholar".

Well he was wrong about the "blue tarp box". Very wrong. He insisted he was right. As if I was telling him the sky was a different color other than blue.

So what makes him right or even qualified to comment on shit like exotic holograms or cgi pre-planned Tv. Why is no one using their brain and asking themselves why they supposedly spent incredible resources on a few crystal clear cgi scenes(while apparently using unclear ones as well), but completely dropped the ball when it came to the grainy and nearly indescernible pentagon videos?

Bottom line: scholarsfor911truth divide and conquer+constant disinfo+no planes+bizarre and forceful behavior+ex-marine+academia being infiltrated=fetzer is an operative.

I don't know what motivates him or what allegiance he has that he is doing this for, but it's clear he is doing it. He is like a cancer on the movement. That's what they do, they attach themselves like tumors and destroy/chip away from within.

Btw, for those reading, if he ever gets in my face or that close to me again he's going to experience a much different outcome.

This post has been edited by Aldo Marquis CIT: Mar 23 2012, 12:18 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 23 2012, 01:14 PM
Post #97



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZvugebaT6Q

That's the real reason for the attempted splicing of NPT with research here and at CIT.

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Mar 23 2012, 01:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrmitosis
post Mar 23 2012, 04:38 PM
Post #98





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 232
Joined: 11-February 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 4,909



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 23 2012, 12:14 PM) *
That's the real reason for the attempted splicing of NPT with research here and at CIT.


Fetzer has done such an exquisite job of hijacking this thread, that a discussion intended to broach hard evidence provided by the NTSB and the rational conclusions which can be drawn from a sober analysis of the data, has been relegated to the Alternative Theories SubForum.

I suspect he even had Rob convinced for a minute that Dennis' article itself is an underhanded attempt to vindicate NPT.

Dennis references the CIT body of research several times in the article. As far as I'm concerned, the implications of CIT's witness accounts are in no way reconcilable with those of NPT. Dennis has every right to feel betrayed by his editor.

Nice one Jimbo.

This post has been edited by mrmitosis: Mar 23 2012, 04:43 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamborine man
post Mar 23 2012, 11:59 PM
Post #99





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 951
Joined: 1-July 07
From: Australia
Member No.: 1,315



QUOTE (Aldo Marquis CIT @ Mar 21 2012, 03:04 PM) *
Tambourine man,

NPT=no planes theory. Not non-impact theory. No planes theory originally and ONLY applied to the asinine disinformation /theories that no planes hit the towers. Disinformation operatives like fetzer and the anonymous Killtown desperately try to link the term to the genuine investigations done by PFT, CIT, and Dom DiMaggio proving there were planes and they didn't hit the target.


Thats it then. NIT = non-impact theory. NIT it shall be from now on then, unless somebody else got other ideas of course?

QUOTE
There were planes used on 9/11 at all events.


In my post further up replying to Wooly and others, i wrote:

'The planes seen and witnessed in the skies that day is a completely different story that deserves its own close
scrutiny and investigation, and which has already for a long period admirably been started by many good people.'

Needless to say that in the above, i of course had both CIT, P4T and Dimaggio in mind, plus a few others!

QUOTE
This Disinformation using the term "no planes" is designed to and HAS hurt the truth movement. It has divided it and allowed us to look inept and kooky.

Do you understand? Just because you redefine the term to mean something else in an attempt to play some type of kumbaya peacemaker doesn't mean the rest of the world defines the term the same way.

Planes hit the towers, videos were not faked.


Ok. In my post above i give reason why i think it's sheer madness to believe planes hit the towers.
A plane flying over 800 Km/h cannot come to a sudden instant stop. That's an impossibility, and i
think you'll embark on an impossible task trying to convince me otherwise. But by all means i don't
mind at all if you try. (Keep in mind that there was no solid reinforced concrete block halfway inside
the tower blocking the path. It was just open office space)!

Question: How long does it take for a plane flying 800 Km/h to cover 64 meters? A gentle blink of an
eye??

QUOTE
Food for thought:

I've mentioned this story before. I met fetzer .......


The weird people over at truthfraction spend around 99% of their time attacking and vilifying 'anybody'
within the "truth movement" they think they can lay their hands on. This includes CIT and P4T.
This is probably more 'cancerous' to the so-called "movement" than anything else, if you ask me.

I advise you not to talk like them - nor sink to their level.

I never interfere when personalities and egos clash, but instead wisely stay outside the ring looking as
a mere humble spectator in amazement upon the spectacle in front of me. I take none of it serious.

But that's not to say i won't interfere and offer help when i see a person being savagely attacked by a
pack of boofhead bogan moron dawg wolfes. Always had a soft spot for the 'underdog' and the
'little people' of this world!

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 24 2012, 04:24 AM
Post #100



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Mar 23 2012, 11:59 PM) *
.....unless somebody else got other ideas of course?


Yes, we do. It has been on the top of our home page since 2006.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org

Pay particular attention to the underlined sentence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

16 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th September 2019 - 04:13 AM